Why stop at socialism. Why not just go full communist?

a reply to: DBCowboy

I agree, we should do away with public schools and make them all private too. What a dumb idea, people getting basic rights and education!

We should make the parents pay out the ass for their kids to have a decent education. If they can't cough up the money, I guess they'll just have to deal with their kids being stupid. After all, who wants a "nanny state"?

It's disgusting that I have to pay for other people's kids educations. As long as my kids get theirs, those poor people can stay poor and their kids can stay dumb.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Local communities could have the schools and probably do better than the federal government.

But you are endorsing the nanny state.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: DBCowboy

I agree, we should do away with public schools and make them all private too. What a dumb idea, people getting basic rights and education!

We should make the parents pay out the ass for their kids to have a decent education. If they can't cough up the money, I guess they'll just have to deal with their kids not being very smart. After all, who wants a "nanny state"? It's disgusting that I have to pay for other people's kids educations.

To be fair, the kids coming out of our public schools are pretty dumb right now and you could characterize that as one of our socialist, government run agencies.

I mean no offense, but I am not sure you have fully educated yourselves on options and solutions that do not involve a big government holding everyone's hand.

a reply to: DBCowboy

If a nanny state means that people who can't afford it getting basic healthcare, then I'm all for it. I'm not going to let arbitrary labels get in the way of people's livelihoods. Maybe you will but not me.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: DBCowboy

If a nanny state means that people who can't afford it getting basic healthcare, then I'm all for it. I'm not going to let arbitrary labels get in the way of people's livelihoods. Maybe you will but not me.

Again, people can get basic healthcare without resorting to socialism. I did not know this was such a black and white issue.

a reply to: ExNihiloRed

What are the alternatives then?

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: DBCowboy

If a nanny state means that people who can't afford it getting basic healthcare, then I'm all for it. I'm not going to let arbitrary labels get in the way of people's livelihoods. Maybe you will but not me.

People received basic healthcare before Obama.

It was against the law to turn away people at a hospital.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1]



Education policy belongs at the state and local level, not at the federal level. If a parent is unhappy with what their child is being taught in school, they can go to that local school board or their state legislature, or their governor and get it changed.

My signature sums up my opinion on the matter.

Everyone will continue to champion capitalism until they find themselves on the unfavorable side of the fence.

Always very amusing to hear people whine about paying taxes though.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: DBCowboy

If a nanny state means that people who can't afford it getting basic healthcare, then I'm all for it. I'm not going to let arbitrary labels get in the way of people's livelihoods. Maybe you will but not me.

Take a look at what other candidates are proposing.

For example, “Instead of relying on an outdated, big-government approach, I will utilize modern, consumer-centered reforms that lower costs, embrace innovation in health-care and actually increase choices and improve quality of care,” Marco Rubio.

originally posted by: ExNihiloRed

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: DBCowboy

If a nanny state means that people who can't afford it getting basic healthcare, then I'm all for it. I'm not going to let arbitrary labels get in the way of people's livelihoods. Maybe you will but not me.

Take a look at what other candidates are proposing.

For example, “Instead of relying on an outdated, big-government approach, I will utilize modern, consumer-centered reforms that lower costs, embrace innovation in health-care and actually increase choices and improve quality of care,” Marco Rubio.

But. . .but. . . that is using the free market approach!

Heresay!

a reply to: ExNihiloRed

But what is that? I could say the same thing, that doesn't mean I'm answering the question though.

a reply to: ExNihiloRed

We pay state taxes for that, still a form of socialism. I never said we need to make education a federal issue.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: ExNihiloRed

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: DBCowboy

If a nanny state means that people who can't afford it getting basic healthcare, then I'm all for it. I'm not going to let arbitrary labels get in the way of people's livelihoods. Maybe you will but not me.

Take a look at what other candidates are proposing.

For example, “Instead of relying on an outdated, big-government approach, I will utilize modern, consumer-centered reforms that lower costs, embrace innovation in health-care and actually increase choices and improve quality of care,” Marco Rubio.

But. . .but. . . that is using the free market approach!

Heresay!

You forgot to tell me how the free market is not "free" and that big brother is my only savior.

"It was that free-market outlook—a set of clear and powerful ideals—that probably ought to be considered Ronald Reagan's most enduring legacy to modern American society."

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Listen, I'm not running for president or claim to be a Nobel Prize winning economist. We each have our opinions. I personally do not think socialism or big government is the solution. This is based on what I have read and heard. I think people need to familiarize themselves with all the options and not just jump on bandwagons (not saying you are doing that, but it is fair to say this is a very American theme).

a reply to: DBCowboy

People still can't be turned away, Obamacare didn't change that. What makes you think it did?

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: ExNihiloRed

We pay state taxes for that, still a form of socialism. I never said we need to make education a federal issue.

I thought we were talking federal government. I'm not sure socialism works the way you think at the state level. We are a bit like ships crossing in the night it seems.

a reply to: ExNihiloRed

I'm not jumping on a bandwagon, but socialist policies seem to be the best option I've come across so far. Those words from Rubio are empty at this point, they have no substance to them.

a reply to: ExNihiloRed

We pay state taxes as well as federal taxes. Both are socialist in nature at both the state and federal levels. Us paying state taxes is what funds education, that is a socialist concept through and through.

a reply to: ExNihiloRed

Government assistance should have always been seen as a last resort, not an option as banal as honey mustard or spicy mustard at your local deli.

The free market takes guts. It used to be, that if you failed, it was on you and you had to start all over again. But the beauty of the free market was that you could try and fail numerous times and always try again.

Ronald Reagan wasn't perfect, but he had the right idea.